Well I would blog it, but there isn’t one. Instead we have a range of reactions from Labour that vary from no comment to trying to rewrite history.

What is especially shameful isn’t just that the Labour leadership and other MPs defended a corrupt MP. But they defended an MP who was exploiting the most vulnerable members of society and treating them as close to slave labour. He got his mate the Associate Minister to get them into NZ, and they worked unpaid for weeks or months on end making Field richer.

Field was everything the Labour Party claims to be against. And all his sins and abuses were detailed by Ingram. And even then they defended him. Clark even said he could return to the Ministry one day – compare that to Key on Worth.

Labour Ministers said there was no issue about his having slave labour work for free on his properties as hey were contractors, not employees!! And never at that time was there a denouncing of what Field did – because they needed his vote.

So did we get it last night. No. First Eddie from The Standard tried to rewrite history in a fashion that could make for a George Orwell novel. He said:

Good on Clark for sacking him as a minister when the allegations first came out.

She never sacked him. And even after the Ingram report came out, she refused to rule out he could be re-appointed to the Ministry.

What a disgusting lowlife. A sycophant who won’t criticise his own party for their disgraceful defence of Field, he just invents lies. Here is the full story on 13 September 2005 from Newstalk ZB. It is in the NZPA database and is no #1436468. I don’t expect an apology because I wouldn’t accept one from the anonymous coward.

Helen Clark says Taito Philip Field was making representation on someone’s behalf with regard to Thai man in Samoa The Prime Minister says the only thing of which Taito Philip Field is guilty is being helpful.

The Labour MP and State Minister has become involved in the efforts of a Thai man seeking residency. The man is waiting in Samoa for his application to be processed after he was denied refugee status.

Sunan Siriwan has been given a job by Taito Phillip Field to tile a house in Samoa.

Mr Field has written in support of the man to Associate Immigration Minister Damien O’Connor.

Helen Clark says Mr Field was making representation on someone’s behalf as MPs often do. She says if they cannot do that, they might as well shut the electorate office doors.

Then we have the Labour MPs, instead of their apologists. The Herald reports:

The man who replaced him as MP for Mangere, Sua William Sio, said he acknowledged the court’s decision, but would not comment further.

Wow that is a condemnation. Maybe he held back as his own office staff are under investigation over an alleged immigration scam.

Labour leader Phil Goff said: “It’s disappointing that a parliamentarian was found guilty of that conduct.

“The verdict is an indication that whatever you are in society you are equal under the law … the law has followed its course.”

Disappointing? It is a disgrace. And not a word on Labour’s defence of Field as a man of integrity whose only sin was to work too hard. And not a word of sympathy for Field’s victims – the so called “strugglers” Labour claims to champion.

Labour chief whip Darren Hughes said the party acknowledged the verdict, but had no further comment.

Labour have had months to prepare for this verdict, and this is all they can say.

Unless someone from Labour’s parliamentary wing does a sincere apology for their behaviour over Field, the conclusion many people will reach is they are unfit to hold office again, and that their so called concern for the welfare of vulnerable New Zealanders is insincere.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 5th, 2009 at 8:04 am and is filed under NZ Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Yes that is telling isn’t it.
they’ve had months to make a statement either way.
clearly they don’t have any feelings of responsibility towards the victims.
I wonder how many other members of parliament are up to no good.
At least 112 of them for sure.

To be fair DPF, the quote in NZPA does appear to be very slightly different to what was reported elsewhere. Where r0b at the Standard falls down is his claim that you dishonestly changed the quote, that you don’t have a source for the quote, or that it makes a difference in substance to the way Labour defended Field, as you alleged.

It’s a sad day for Labour when this is the only line they can run.

When Mr Goff became Leader he quickly asserted a semi-apology for the way Labour became out of step with the public on a couple of issues. It seems to me that the Field case is another example where Mr Goff could differentiate himself from Labour’s past. He could stand up and say: “The way Labour defended Mr Field was a mark on our credibility, and we have learned from that. If I had been leader at the time, I would have acted differently.”

I think Mr Goff would get a lot of kudos if he expressed contrition in that way.

Unless there is evidence that Mr Goff supported Mr Field, which might prevent Mr Goff from expressing this sort of apology.

There seems to be a lot of bitterness over at the Stranded, not only on this issue but generally. The lofty heights have been torn from under them and I think the realisation is just setting in that it will be a long, long time before they will touch the levers of power again.

The fact that they are trying to rewrite history in such an obvious and stupid way, accusing you of all sorts of nefarious crimes and, it appears, starting to delete comments a la the Kim Il Jong of the Kiwi blogland ;Bomber Bradbury tells you that they are on the run.

You have to laugh though because all of the above just makes them look like a total bunch of arsewipes.

Censorship by the Left is nowhere more starkly displayed than on the Interwebs.

As i pointed out yesterday, Hansard indicates that Phil Goff and David Cunliffe are up to their eyeballs in the kak created by Field.

Cunliffe, as the minister of Immigration, continued to obfuscate in favour of Field a number of times following the release of the Ingram report. Goff was mentioned a number of times having visited the Samoan home of Field and meeting the Thai workers at the crux of the issue.

It is alleged that Goff refused to assist the Ingram enquiry. The Labour cabinet set the terms of reference that predetermined the outcome of the Ingram enquiry. Could this be a Prima Facie case of conspiring to pervert the course of justice, especially given yesterdays verdict? Any Legal types out there care to give an opinion on this?

Is this why we have seen no apology from Labour? Are they too busy circling the legal wagons?

Different media report different parts of what an MP says. This is common. But rob alleged I tampered with the quote, and as I have demonstrated I did no such thing – I quoted the story. And as you say it makes no difference to the substance anyway.

I am pretty disgusted that even now, they can’t admit their party did anything wrong. Such blind sycophancy is sickening. It is zealotry.

On Goff I agree. This was a golden opportunity to be a real leader and acknowledge Labour’s defence of Field (and Peters) is part of why they lost office. He did it with the EFA, and should do it with Field.

And you know if Labour do not do a mea culpa, I predict many people attending meet the candidate meetings in 2011 and asking why Labour defended a corrupt MP. It can’t be because they did not know – as they continued to do so after the Ingram Report came out.

The NZPA intro is not a quote as it does not appear in quote marks. That said calling you a liar for declaring a paraphrased intro is a quote is going a bit far.

I think Labour will just keep mum on this and let it pass and I think they’ll get away with it. It’s understandable as it was an inglorious moment for the party and I don’t think the mud will stick, especially as Field’s family is attacking Labour and thus putting even more distance between him and the party.

Why is anybody surprised that the Labour party defends illegal actions and will accept corruption, illegal actions and everything else in the name of power?

Remember – this is the party that takes democracy and turns it into their play-thing. They rewrote the law to legalise their criminality. They deliberately set out to stop political opposition. They politicised the public service. They have a few incidents of violent assault in parliament. From behind! They demonised a religious group for political ends. They used their political power to remove anyone critical of them. The list goes on and on and on. And their supporters defend ALL their actions. To this day.

and even the once lovable and reasonable Toad has gone rougue. Perhaps the realisation is finally seeping in, and the anger is only now coming to the fore. What are the stages again? Shock. Disbelief. Anger. I guess we can only hope Acceptance takes a few years.

Yes I think they are bitter
eg
“What would you call it when you tell the Electoral Commission and Ministerial Services that you live somewhere other than where you, your partner and your children actually live and work?”

Mind you good question though isn’t it

Field is obviously a tosser and a liar no argument there

But English has lied to the Electoral commission
He should probably resign don’t you think?
I can say with considerable certainty that you would be screaming for a labour finance minister to resign if he had down and out lied
so he could screw the taxpayer out of a Grand a week

[DPF: You do not know the law obviously. Go read the Electoral Act and the section that deals with determining where an MP lives. Then come back and try and make a sensible contribution once you have some facts]

Kapital, if Mr English lied to the electoral commission when he declared that his primary residence is in Dipton, when his family lives in Wellington and he spends most of his time in Wellington, then Mr Goff is a liar for claiming he is a resident of Mt Roskill while he spends most of his time in Wellington, and his family lives on his south Auckland farm. I suspect Mr English spends as much time in Dipton as Mr Goff does in Mt Roskill.

Not that this has anything to do with Mr Field though, but keep trolling if it helps you adjust to Labour’s dishonesty.

the only thing of which Taito Philip Field is guilty is being helpful.

compare that to Key on Worth.

Are you saying that Key sacked Worth because he was employing slave labour?

[DPF: The comparison is that Clark said she would not rule out Field returning to the Ministry – even after she had read the Ingram report. While Key ruled out a return for Worth over much more minor matters]

It is a serious indictment on the MSM, both at the release of the Ingram report and subsequently, could not have followed the obvious signposts he left in the report and exposed the avoidance and obfuscating of the government at the time in perpetrating their hold on power and the illadvised defense of’ Mr’ Field.

>First Eddie from The Standard tried to rewrite history in a fashion that could make for a George Orwell novel.

We’ve already seen Labour try to rewrite history on the foreshore and seabed issue, with their claims that they were forced to legislate because Don Brash was going to be elected Leader of the Opposition sometime in the future and it all had to be announced within hours of the court decision, so it is all Don Brash’s fault.

Someone needs to guard NZ’s history, before Labour and The Standard start changing it all.

Being on the losing end is not a disgrace, every four years some-one loses and some-one wins.
Being on the losing side can even be beneficial and some would say necessary for the continuing
good health of a party. To bring in a fresh look like national had to do.

But to have everything you stand for, social equality and justice and standing up for the weakest,
proven to be a lie, must hurt. I say it must because when even people who sometimes actually shows some ability to debate
to try and obfuscate and “joke” to diminish the brutality of the truth, it means there is nothing else left.

I look at you and Irish Bill, Rob and Eddie, and I see the man from La Mancha and Sancho Panza…. Oh how the windmills trembled.

I am not surprised Labour hasn’t apologised. Apologising would be admitting they’ve done wrong. Helen Clarks behavior in this was inexcusable and it is worrying that someone who turns a blind eye like this is heading an important arm of the UN which is supposed to be assisting the worlds poorest and is an organization which has a recent history of corruption.

What Ferdinand said. You can’t take a paraphrased sentence from a source that isn’t in quotation marks, place it in quotation marks (implying it is a verbatim quote), and claim you have a source for the quote. Imagine if the Standard did something like that to a quote from Key, for example. Clark’s weasel words don’t really change much about the quote, but it’s important to leave them in.

[DPF: I was quoting the media. If the story was still online I would of course link to it but it was not. Regardless the media ran a story attributing that view to Clark and I merely quoted the media story. At the end of the day the difference is trivial anyway as Clark’s initial defence of Field was not so bad. What is unforgiveable is their defence after they read the Ingram Report]

Unless someone from Labour’s parliamentary wing does a sincere apology for their behaviour over Field, the conclusion many people will reach is they are unfit to hold office again, and that their so called concern for the welfare of vulnerable New Zealanders is insincere.

Give us a break – that is pure bluster.

Matthew 7:3

And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

So… Is Taito Field now going to reveal who knew what and when. He has nothing to loose now and it is very unlikely that he didn’t have active cover from people in Labour that he can now disclose.
He should be talking to Investigate magazine about now….

I would have thought, at the very least, Labour would have issued some sort of hand washing quote – ‘The legal process has come to a conclusion and we accept that. Whilst we cannot be held responsible for the actions of one person there is a degree of embarrassment that this man represented this party of which we are so proud and even anger that he allowed his colleagues to defend what has turned out to be a lie. It is disappointing for us and disappointing for democracy although some comfort can be taken from the fact that Mr Field’s wrong doing has been exposed by a thorough legal process. With this sorry business concluded Labour remain focused on keeping the government to account and showing that John Key is an asshole [insert latest conspiracy theory here]’

How often is it that people so smart can be so dumb. I, like any other human capable of tying their own shoe laces, was outraged by the brazen duplicity and the lengths the Labour government went to to sweep it under the carpet. But does anyone seriously expect any remorse? Come on, you are better than that DPF. You rightly state Labour have had a good deal of time to prepare for this verdict, yet they refuse to comment. Labour spent nine years dumbing down our population, grooming them to accept any two bit throw away remark as a defense to any treasonous act. Kiwi’s have such short simple memories, that this will all be forgotten by the time the All Blacks loose their next game.

I’d be happy for Field to escape jail IF he’d sit down with a US-style special prosecutor and detail everything about his crimes, including who knew what and when. I’d love to see Field free at home in Mangere if it meant Clark, Goff, and others were under investigation for their part in the cover up.

I notice that, on the parliamentary web page of the entity formerly known as Taito Philip Field, that the word “Taito” is indicative of chiefly rank in Samoa and was “bestowed by the village of Manase, Savaii, Western Samoa, 1975″

I wonder whether it is still appropriate.

If they bought into the nonsense spouted by Mr Field’s daughter on TV last night, the good citizens of Manase may still stand by their man.

Here in NZ, however, he has surely forfeited his right to such courtesies and should revert to the names he was given at birth “Philip Hans Field” (Samoa was a German colony in its distant past).

On Monday and Tuesday this week, I was at the Tangi of a senior Immigration Official, and had the opportunity to meet with a number of high level members of the department, many of them Maori or Pasifika. Although I did not have the opportunity to speak to them after the verdict, there was discussion over the period of the deliberations, and the general consensus was that a guilty verdict would be welcome and appropriate. I dare say that a few more beverages would have been consumed at the wake once the verdict was known.

Incase you hadn’t noticed dpf there is no quote in that story. just something being paraphrased which you turned into a quote. academia would have your ass for that, but then again, r0b did the same thing with his counter quote so perhaps two wrongs make a right?

DPF wrote: “Unless someone from Labour’s parliamentary wing does a sincere apology for their behaviour over Field, the conclusion many people will reach is they are unfit to hold office again, and that their so called concern for the welfare of vulnerable New Zealanders is insincere”.

I doubt there will ever be a sincere apology! Has anyone read the latest Listener where they interview Labour politicians about the post Clark era etc? It was so funny I thought it would have been a topic in itself here!

My copy is at home so I can only summise from the top of my head but in essence Clark directed the leadership change (to Goff/King – as there weren’t any other credible contenders – at least at this point in time), Goff/King basically will not face any leadership challenges for 3 years (presumably that means should Labour lose in 2011 then others may get their chance then), Clark’s still in regular contact with her former MP’s & Goff/King couldn’t seem to stamp their authority fully until Clark/Cullen departed in April. Etc.

Meethinks Clark is still pulling too many strings even from NY hence this unbelievably lame Labour Opposition, continuing the muck raking as though H1 had never left, still seeming to be out of step with the public on a range of issues, not being able to say “sorry”, almost is if they (Clark) is wishing to continue spiting John Key for successfully winning the 2008 election etc.

With Labour still stacked with Clark’s buddies and free loaders, I doubt Goff/King will get much traction and be able to say “SORRY” when and where it really counts!

phil u – I can’t tell whether your comment was on or off topic. I read English, quite competently, but I struggle with grammar-less ramblings. Frankly, every comment you make should incur demerits for abuse of the English language.

For political expediency Labour chose to diminish the Field scandal. National were right up in the polls. An election was two months away. After the election Labour needed his vote because the numbers were so close. Clarke and her Ministers clearly thought ‘the means justifies the end.’ The end was the power of a third term, the means was to keep Field’s vote by spinning the story until Field returned Mangere, then dragging the process.

DPF is right. Labour have been ‘insincere’ and behaved ‘shamefully’. They did it to keep power. No doubt Clarke asked Field for his version as soon as the scandal broke. He lied to her as he has lied along. Hence the statement,“the only thing of which Taito Philip Field is guilty is being helpful“. Her instincts would have been aroused, but she needed Field. She supported him until it got too hot.

Now that DPF has launched such a scathing attack on his political opponents it will be interesting to follow his own sincerity in exposing any shameful behaviour coming from the current Government.

‘A sycophant who won’t criticise his own party,’ is a DPF criticism we should all keep in mind when reading this blog.

[DPF: On three occasions I stated (as an example) that the allegations around immigration job offers from a National MP should be referred to an independent inquiry]

bharmer (302)
August 5th, 2009 at 10:35 am
I notice that, on the parliamentary web page of the entity formerly known as Taito Philip Field, that the word “Taito” is indicative of chiefly rank in Samoa and was “bestowed by the village of Manase, Savaii, Western Samoa, 1975″

I wonder whether it is still appropriate.

If they bought into the nonsense spouted by Mr Field’s daughter on TV last night, the good citizens of Manase may still stand by their man.

Here in NZ, however, he has surely forfeited his right to such courtesies and should revert to the names he was given at birth “Philip Hans Field” (Samoa was a German colony in its distant past).

Speaking as someone with some Samoan blood (my mother was born there), this “Taito” (or Cheifly Rank or “Matai” title etc) is BULLSHIT in a NZ context.

To become a Chief, one could simply “buy” the title eg go to poor village (relatively speaking they are poor), meet the village Matai etc. If there is agreement, then one could support the village (there is nothing wrong with that) and that could involve providing (the money for) a feast, perhaps provide some money for education, perhaps provide for the other Matai. As I say there’s nothing wrong with that per se, except that in a NZ context the title “Taito” is meaningless, in fact it is only relevent to that village. For go to another village, sure a visiting Matai would receive respect but they aren’t Royalty visiting etc (get the difference? It’s like Colin Meads visits a NZ town, lots of respect but at the end of the day the town folk don’t own Colin Meads anything).

Philip Feild used his title to confuse NZ’ers and make out he was more important than he was. He is only important to the village of Manase. Of course the villagers of Manase will (mostly) stand by Philip Feild. For it is not their place to criticise their Matai, elders etc, despite getting caught with his pants down etc.

It is also expected that people of Philip Feild’s status will have the right to exploit people to come and work and clean up his house. I’ve seen that with some extended family members here in NZ and is one reason why my mother turned to NZ culture to get away from this expolitation and dependancy etc. Note it may seem that I’m disrespecting Chiefs/matai’s etc, not at all, as I said there may be a place for this in Samoa, but in a NZ context it’s irrelevant.

It will be instructive to see the sentence Field gets – custodial a must and reflect the seriousness of the offences – corruption, bribery & perverting the course of justice. A light sentence will indicate that the judiciary are political or politically influenced and a heavy (I Hope) will encourage (I Hope) field to go feral – the thoughts of Helen being arrested at the airport and other Labour MPs especially Wilson & Simpson is enough to provoke a spontaneous orgasm.

“I think Mr Goff would get a lot of kudos if he expressed contrition in that way.”

Tim, marks for contrition come from actually BEING contrite. History demonstrates that the great seagull says whatever it takes. After Lange’s gummint got the heave he was “contrite” about the economic direction it took after a weekend hugga mugga fest. After Klerk’s gummint he was “contrite” about “some things”.

But he didn’t seem too concerned about stealing taxpayer money, legitimising the theft, having anything to do with Peters, the lies about ACC, the train set … blah blah blah … shafting fundamental constitutional and property rights without a mandate … Owen Glenn … the grotesque slug Williams …

There is a pattern here Tim in case you haven’t noticed. Rape, pillage, plunder, gouge, rort, steal, collude, lie or do what you like when you’re in. Be “contrite” when you get the arse. It doesn’t wash. It won’t wash. That seagull will not ever change its spots (so to speak).

I wouldn’t be so confident that Labour will wear the consequences of their venality – for that to happen, the media would have to pick up the history and remind people of it. If the Dominion Post is anything to go by, they will protect Labour. And I say this as someone who has voted Labour in 12 out of the last 13 elections.

Labour leader Phil Goff said: “It’s disappointing that a parliamentarian was found guilty of that conduct………..

If my memory is correct it was Phil GOFF together with Immigration Minister Damian O’Connor who were graciously hosted by FIELD at his mansion in Samoa while the Thai tiler was slaving there, indeed that information first came from the tiler. It is inconceivable that O’Connor and Goff were un-aware of the circumstances of the Tiler….GOFF has chosen his words carefully.

GOFF:::“The verdict is an indication that whatever you are in society you are equal under the law … the law has followed its course.”

No you are not, and no it hasn’t, there are too many guilty parties the law hasn’t followed like himself….If FIELD was to come clean on the affair through his lawyer to the Police he could expect some mitigating concessions to be made at sentencing.

JOHN KEY…is reported stating words to effect that this was a unique and isolated offence……..No it isn’t ,there is still the matter of an international multi million dollar chinese criminal who one CUNLIFFE is reported to have confirmed his citizenship in direct contradiction to the Immigration Department who pointed out that he was wanted in several countries.Then there was the subsequent action of Dover SAMUELS in arranging a personal naturalisation ceremony for said criminal at Parliament no less. Surely these actions rival those of Field in integrity.

The Police also don’t emerge with the kudos they are claiming over this matter. They sat on it and did nothing even after it had been officially referred to them to such an extent that the Tiler had been removed from Samoa penniless back to Thailand prior to them even considering interviewing him.

The Police have recently with some justification been obliged to sign up to a formal code of conduct, I don’t know whats in it, but it seems to me there is an even greater need for Cabinet Ministers to have to do likewise.

Okay Brendon, Do you think that it could be because he has a set of standards.

Let me give you a senario. Now I am not for a moment suggesting that this is in fact the way it is. Just a senario.
Say Worth has actually ended up in some-one’s bedroom a number of times, who is not his wife but is in act some-one who can cause problems for the government. Now Key decides rightly to get rid of Worth because he can become an embarrassment. However up to now in the media we simply have rumour and innuendo that tend to die away eventually. However if Key comes out and confirms it, it will be in the history books forever. So who loses the most? Key is vindicated in the eyes of the left for spilling the nasty details. Worth is no better off and no worse off. the general public does not gain anything as the only ones really interested in the sordid details are the ones who might have used up their porn budget for the month. So who really is affected. Well Worths wife and family. And just maybe, that is a price, Key is not prepared to pay.

Like I said just a theory and there is 4 or 5 more that explains it just as well.

However if your porn budget is exhausted for the month, I am sure google would be your buddy.

In Parliament yesterday, National MP Lockwood Smith asked if Helen Clark’s “maintenance of regular contact with Taito Phillip Field led her to stand by her statement of 14 September last year: “I think the only thing he is probably guilty of is trying to be helpful to someone; if not, why not?”

She replied: “Indeed I think he was, but I am awaiting a full report.”

In that specific context, that’s clearly short-form for: “Indeed I think he was probably guilty of trying to be helpful to someone“. So Clark didn’t deny making the quoted statement, which she could easily have done, and actually endorsed it. I’d love to see “r0b” at The Standard (a dedicated Labour party hack) argue otherwise.

Hansard seems a bit off-colour so I can’t pull up the actual parliamentary transcript of this exchange – can anyone else assist?

Niggly said: It is also expected that people of Philip Feild’s status will have the right to exploit people to come and work and clean up his house. I’ve seen that with some extended family members here in NZ and is one reason why my mother turned to NZ culture to get away from this expolitation and dependancy etc. Note it may seem that I’m disrespecting Chiefs/matai’s etc, not at all, as I said there may be a place for this in Samoa, but in a NZ context it’s irrelevant.

Interesting comment. I recall seeing something on one of the Pacifica programmes along these lines. A Somoan MP basically saying it would be rude if he didn’t take gifts from his constituients and was sure that was all TPF was doing.

Either way, it all shows that corruption under Helengrad was not an Ian Wishart fantasy.
It does make you wonder what other scandals Investigate uncovered can now be proven in court.
How are Shane Jones and David Cunliffe feeling today.
As I have blogged over at my place, the Field case strengthens all the allegations and the central theme of the book Absolute Power.
It adds credence to Air Con too.

BRENDON…..I think Phil GOFF should make a clear and transparent explanation on why he set up Honeytrap Neelam to try an entrap the elderly vulnerable WORTH in some sordid little scandel given that he would have been aware of her closeness to a fraudulent immigration scam.

Bit disingenuous there Brendon. On the one hand you are calling for the media to not trivialize things, on the other hand you are calling for sensationalist details. How in gods name do you come up Key providing a reason for losing confidence as part of open government?

Now if Key had said, “so we have some-one we dont want any more but we are not going to say who it is.” But you sound lioke a jilted lover plaintively asking “But why dont you love me any-more”. There is just no reason to say why. It is of absolutely no consequence.

August 5th, 2009 at 2:23 pmInteresting comment. I recall seeing something on one of the Pacifica programmes along these lines. A Somoan MP basically saying it would be rude if he didn’t take gifts from his constituients and was sure that was all TPF was doing.

Hmmm.

I would say in the Samoan MP case you mentioned, it is a matter of ethics. The MP does not have to accept gifts from his constituents! But it is a good excuse (and one that Philip Feild used) for him to use to try and justify his ends!

I think of those Samoan (etc) churches which expect their congregation to cough up a lot collection money (and the more money, then supposedly the better). Again there is an obligation from the common man (and woman) of the congregation to cough up when people in authority ask. Ditto the same applies to Philip Feildand this Samoan MP. They know they have their people at their beck and call!

Ironically all this goes against mainstream Left thinking of course (eg propping up privilaged people in power) so one hopes Samoans (especially those in NZ) get some backing from mainstream kiwis to question these blatant abuses of power!

and even the once lovable and reasonable Toad has gone rougue. Perhaps the realisation is finally seeping in, and the anger is only now coming to the fore. What are the stages again? Shock. Disbelief. Anger. I guess we can only hope Acceptance takes a few years.

On a related note, I haven’t seen mickey or Jack all day and phool has been quieter than usual.